Random forest model for prediction of chip layout attributes

ABSTRACT

An improved random forest model is provided, which has been trained based on silicon data generated from tests of previously fabricated chips. An input is provided to the random forest model, the input including a feature set of a pattern within a particular chip layout, the feature set identifying geometric attributes of polygonal elements within the pattern. A result is generated by the random forest model based on the input, where the result identifies a predicted attribute of the pattern based on the silicon data, and the result is generated based at least in part on determining, within the random forest model, that geometric attributes of the pattern were included in the previously fabricated chips, where the previously fabricated chips have chip layouts are different from the particular chip layout.

TECHNICAL FIELD

This disclosure relates in general to the field of computer systems and,more particularly, to search engines for use in integrated circuitdevelopment and testing.

BACKGROUND

In the field of integrated circuit (IC) manufacturing, a process knownas photolithography (or simply “lithography”) is typically employed inorder to form circuitry features onto a substrate, such as a siliconwafer. In the process, an exposure operation is performed wherebyselective portions of a photoresist film that is disposed on the wafersurface is exposed to electromagnetic radiation. The type ofelectromagnetic radiation used will depend upon the sizes of thecircuitry features being formed. Typically, the smaller the size of thecircuitry features being formed, the shorter the wavelengths of theelectromagnetic radiation will be.

A goal in lithography is to maintain uniformity of each instance of anidentical structure imaged or “printed” onto the substrate. In somecases, there may be systemic defects in certain structures that arisefrom a variety of causes such as imperfections in components of thelithography tool, mask defects, among other issues. As lithographytechniques may be used not only to write patterns to fabricatesemiconductor devices, but also to fabricate masks used therein, suchsystematic defects may arise in both cases, among other issues.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1A illustrates the physical design of an exemplary planartransistor.

FIG. 1B illustrates an exemplary cross-section of the planar transistorof FIG. 1A taken along the line A-A′.

FIGS. 2A-2F illustrate an exemplary photolithography process.

FIGS. 3A-3D illustrate the differences between as-drawn physical designfeatures and as-printed wafer features due to process distortion effectsand the use of optical proximity correction to counter those effects.

FIG. 4 illustrates an embodiment of how silicon data can be captured ina manufacturing process and provided to a system employing technologiesdescribed herein to aid process development and monitor process health.

FIG. 5 is a block diagram of an example computing system implementing animproved machine learning model in accordance with some embodiments.

FIG. 6 is a block diagram illustrating an example development of a setof random forest machine learning models in accordance with someembodiments.

FIG. 7 is a simplified block diagram illustrating a relationship betweenchip pattern geometry and trees within an example random forest model inaccordance with some embodiments.

FIG. 8A is a simplified block diagram illustrating use of silicon datato train a set of random forest models in accordance with someembodiments.

FIG. 8B is a simplified block diagram illustrating use of an example setof random forest models in accordance with some embodiments.

FIG. 9 is a simplified block diagram illustrating principles fortraining an example random forest model in accordance with someembodiments.

FIG. 10 is a simplified block diagram illustrating the generation ofpredictions using an example random forest model in accordance with someembodiments.

FIG. 11 is a simplified block diagram illustrating a decision tree of anexample random forest model incorporating linear regression models inaccordance with some embodiments.

FIG. 12 is a flowchart illustrating an example technique for usingrandom forest models to predict attributes of a proposed chip layoutdesign in accordance with some embodiments.

FIG. 13 is a block diagram of an exemplary processor in accordance withone embodiment.

FIG. 14 is a block diagram of an exemplary computing system inaccordance with one embodiment.

Like reference numbers and designations in the various drawings indicatelike elements.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EXAMPLE EMBODIMENTS

Semiconductor manufacturing has become increasingly complex over theyears. Since the turn of the century, the minimum feature size hasshrunk by over an order of magnitude as the industry has progressed fromthe 130 nm to 10 nm technology nodes. At the same time, processorcomplexity has also increased. Current flagship semiconductor productshave transistor counts that well exceed 10 billion. To handle thesereduced feature sizes and increased chip complexities, companies mustinvest billions of dollars and years of research of developments effortsto build state-of-the-art fabrication facilities. The industry has donewhat it can to decrease manufacturing costs by, for example, moving from200 mm to 300 mm wafers at the 90 nm technology node, but the overalltrend has been companies have to be willing to pay an increasing priceif they want to transition to the next generation of semiconductormanufacturing technology. With up to hundreds of individual dies on awafer that now spans 12 inches wide, the total number of transistorsthat can be printed on a wafer is on the scale of one trillion.Developing a high-volume manufacturing process that can reliablymanufacture transistors at such an extreme scale presents considerablechallenges.

Turning now to FIGS. 1-3, an overview of various aspects ofsemiconductor device manufacturing is presented. FIG. 1A illustrates thephysical design of an exemplary planar transistor. As well be discussedin greater detail below, the physical design of a product is used togenerate masks that will be used during manufacturing to print thefeatures on a wafer needed to implement the product. The physical designis typically a series of polygons drawn at various layers (e.g., gatelayer, contact layer, metal-1 layer).

Transistor 100 is a field-effect-transistor (FET), the transistor typeused in most modern semiconductor devices. Transistor 100 comprises gate110, drain 120, and source 130 regions. The gate region in afield-effect transistor can be thought of as an “on-off” switch thatcontrols the flow of current between the drain and source. When gate 110is “off”, there is no (or little) current flowing through the channelregion connecting drain 120 to source 130, and when gate 110 is “on”,current readily flows through the channel region. Transistor 100 isconnected to other transistors by a series of interconnect layers thatare stacked vertically on top of transistor 100. Contacts 140 connectdrain 120 to segment 150 of a first metal layer (M1), and contacts 160connect source 130 to M1 segment 170. M1 segments 150 and 170 are inturn connected to second layer metal (M2) segments 180 and 190 by afirst level of “vias” (V1) 192 and 196, respectively. In general, metallayer thickness increases as one moves up the interconnect stack, withthe thinner, lower-level metals being generally used for local routingof signals, and the thicker, upper-level metals being used for globalsignal routing and power/ground planes. For simplicity, FIG. 1A onlyshows two levels of metal. Current semiconductor manufacturing processescan have up ten layers of interconnect.

FIG. 1B illustrates an exemplary cross-section of the planar transistorof FIG. 1A taken along the line A-A′. Cross-section 105 shows gate 110separated from drain 120 and source 130 regions by high-k dielectriclayer 124, which electrically insulates gate 110 from drain 120 andsource 130 regions. Transistor 100 is in substrate region 186 and isinsulated from adjacent transistors by oxide regions 182. The planartransistor illustrated in FIGS. 1A and 1B is just one type of transistortopography, the planar nature of the transistor reflecting that thegate, source, and drain regions are located on or are adjacent to arelatively planar surface. Another type of transistor topography is thenon-planar transistor topography used in FinFETS, which are used almostexclusively in cutting-edge manufacturing processes. FinFETS arefield-effect transistors that operate under the same general principleas planar FET transistors—a gate controls the flow of current betweendrain and source regions—with the modification that the gate wrapsaround a series of “fins” that extend vertically upwards from the wafersurface.

Starting with a “blank” silicon wafer, hundreds of processing steps areperformed to build the transistors and interconnects needed to create afinished device. Essential to semiconductor manufacturing is the processof photolithography, by which patterns are transferred from a mask ontoa wafer. As previously mentioned, masks are used to define the shape andlocation of the various features for a processing layer. For example, afirst mask can define oxide regions, a second mask can define high-kdielectric regions, a third mask can define source and drain regions,and a fourth mask can define where contacts will be placed. Additionalmasks are used to define each metal layer and the intervening vialayers.

FIGS. 2A-2F illustrate an exemplary photolithography process. Process200 illustrates how oxide regions 182 in FIG. 1B can be created usingphotolithography. In FIG. 2A, a thin silicon dioxide layer 220 isthermally grown across the top of silicon substrate 210. Silicon nitridelayer 230, a protective layer, is deposited on top of silicon dioxidelayer 220. In FIG. 2B, photoresist 240 is deposited on the wafer. Aphotoresist is a material whose reactance to an etchant or solventincreases (if a positive photoresist) or decreases (negativephotoresist) upon exposure to light. In process 200, photoresist 240 isa positive photoresist. In FIG. 2C, mask 250 with patterns 260 drawn onit is oriented above the substrate 210 and exposed to light 270. Thelight 270 passes through transparent region 254 of the mask (where nopatterns have been drawn) and exposes photoresist 240. Mask regions 260where patterns have been drawn are opaque to light 270 and thephotoresist regions under patterns 260 are not exposed to light 270. InFIG. 2D, photoresist 240 is chemically developed and the regions exposedto light 270 are dissolved. The remaining portions of photoresist 240can now act as an on-wafer mask to allow for the selective processing ofnitride layer 230. In FIG. 2E, the wafer is subjected to an etch stepthat removes the silicon nitride 230, silicon dioxide layer 230, and aportion of the substrate 210 to create trench 270. In FIG. 2F, thephotoresist and nitride layers are removed, and trench 270 is filledwith silicon dioxide to create shallow trench isolation (STI) region 280that serves to keep transistors built in regions 294 and 298electrically isolated from each other. In a similar manner, metal layermasks where metal will be deposited, gate masks define where high-kdielectric layers will be formed, etc.

As masks are the means by which features and patterns are realized on awafer, any semiconductor device design must ultimately be reduced to aphysical design from which masks can be generated. The physical designof a transistor (such as FIG. 1A), circuit, or processor to bemanufactured is often referred to as a “layout.” Electronic designautomation (EDA) tools allow microprocessor architects and circuitdesigners to design at levels of abstraction above the physical designlevel, sparing them from having to spend their days drawing polygons inphysical design CAD tools to realize their designs. Architects typicallydefine their designs in a hardware design language (HDL), such as VHDLor Verilog. Once their designs have been verified to perform as desired,physical design can be generated automatically using a library ofstandard layout cells. Circuit designers often seek performance orfunctionality not available using standard cells, and typically entertheir designs into a schematic capture tool. Once their custom designsare finalized, the circuit schematics are handed off to layout designerswho manually craft the custom circuit layouts.

Regardless of whether a physical design is generated automatically ormanually, it must conform to a set layout design rules that has beenestablished for the relevant manufacturing process. Design rules areconstraints that the physical design must obey in order to ensure that aproduct that can be manufactured with a high degree of repeatability.Most design rules express a minimum feature width or space, for example:gate width must be greater than or equal to 10 nm, source/draindiffusion enclosure of a contact must be at least 16 nm, the width of afirst metal layer trace must be at least 20 nm, the space betweenmetal-1 traces must be at least 20 nm, etc. Design rules represent atrade-off between feature density and manufacturability. Being able toprint smaller feature sizes can mean more dies can be packed onto awafer, which can reduce product cost, but if the process cannot reliablyprint the smaller features, the resulting reduction in wafer yield canmore than offset the cost reduction gained by being able to print moredies on a wafer.

Developing design rules for a new process can be difficult as unexpecteddifficulties can arise. For example, a feature may not scale as much asexpected from the previous technology generation due to unforeseendifficulties with a new processing step, a new tool, or other reasons.As process engineers develop a new manufacturing process, theycontinually fine-tune the individual processing steps to remove as manydefect sources as possible. At some point, the process has been tunedenough that the remaining defects that need to be rooted occur soinfrequently that they are difficult to find. Process engineers need tofind the occurrence of the rare event during process development so thatthey can determine whether a tweak to the process can be figured out toreduce the occurrence of the rare event, or to add a design rule to thedesign rule set so that physical design arrangements that correlate tothe rare event are kept out of the final physical design.

Once a physical design is clear of design rule violations, it is passedto the mask generation phase of the EDA tool flow. The mask generationphase is far from trivial due to the facts that the minimum feature sizethat can be printed clearly in a photolithographic process is limited bythe wavelength of the light source used, and the large discrepancybetween the wavelength of the light (λ=193 nm) that has been used sincethe 90 nm technology node and the minimum feature sized demanded by thecurrent technology node (10 nm). In response to this challenge, thesemiconductor industry has developed resolution enhancement technologies(RET) to allow for the printing of features well below the light sourcewavelength. A first set of RET techniques works to increase resolutionor depth of focus, and a second set compensates for distortion effectdue to printing features with a wavelength larger than the minimumfeature desired as well as distortions inherent in deposition, etching,and other process steps. The first set includes techniques such asphase-shift masks and double-patterning, and the second set includesoptical proximity correction (OPC).

FIGS. 3A-3D illustrate the differences between as-drawn physical designfeatures and as-printed wafer features due to process distortion effectsand the use of optical proximity correction to counter those effects.FIG. 3A illustrates two gate polygons 300 in a physical design beforebeing subjected to the OPC process. FIG. 3B illustrates a simplifiedview of how polygons 300 may appear after being printed on a wafer.Outlines 310 represent the boundaries of original polygons 300 andshapes 320 represents the corresponding as-printed features. Processdistortions results in the ends and exterior corners of shapes 320 beingrounded off (324, 328), interior corners being filled in (334), andtraces being narrowed due to nearby neighboring features (338). FIG. 3Cillustrates exemplary modified polygons 340 generated by subjectingoriginal polygons 300 to an OPC process to counter process distortions.Modified polygons 340 are more complicated than original polygons 300.Modified polygons 340 include “dog-bone” features 344 that compensatefor end rounding, “ear” features 348 that compensate for cornerrounding, “mouse-bite” features 354 that compensate for interior cornerrounding, and thickening features 358 that compensate for nearbyneighbors. FIG. 3D illustrates a simplified view of how modified shapes340 may appear after being printed. Outlines 310 again represent theboundaries of original polygons 300. Modification of original polygonsby the OPC process results in printed features 360 that are closer tooriginal polygons 300 shapes and sizes. The ends and corners of shapes360 are less rounded off, the interior corners are less filled in, andthe impact of nearby neighbors is diminished.

While OPC generation (and other RET techniques) have allowed minimalfeature size to scale with technology node as the wavelength of thephotolithographic light source has remained constant, it does not comewithout its costs. OPC generation is computationally intensive. OPCmodels, also known as OPC “recipes”, can be based on physical models ofvarious processing steps (photolithography, diffusion, etch, deposition,etc.) and attempt to compensate for the distortion of individual maskfeatures, or be rule-based models that generate OPC features based onthe layout characteristics (e.g., width, length, and shape of individualfeatures and their nearest-neighbors) without relying on physicalmodels. The application of model based OPC recipes to a completephysical design may involve the application of physical models to over10 billion shapes at the gate layer alone and to billions of othershapes on other layers. Further, the generation of rule-based OPCrecipes, which can be less computationally expensive that model-basedOPC recipes, can be an involved process. Generation of rule-based OPCrecipes can be based on trial-and-error due to a lack of fullunderstanding of the complex physics and chemistries at play in thedevelopment of cutting-edge processing technologies. Thistrial-and-error can comprise iteratively manufacturing features withmany variations of candidate OPC recipes and seeing which recipesproduce the best results.

FIG. 4 illustrates an embodiment of how silicon data can be captured ina manufacturing process and provided to a system employing technologiesdescribed herein to aid process development and monitor process health.Silicon wafer 400 comprises dies 410. As discussed earlier, currenttechnology nodes employ 300 mm wafers, meaning a wafer can comprisehundreds of dies. Individual dies are separated by scribe lines that cancontain test structures for process development or monitoring processhealth and that are consumed by the dicing process, whereby a wafer iscut into individual dies. During the manufacture of silicon wafer 400,silicon data 420 can be generated that can be used in the development ofa new process or in monitoring the health of an existing one. Silicondata 420 can be any data collected during the manufacturing of wafer400, including SEM images, TEM images, and diagnostic data. Diagnosticdata can include data collected from the scribe line test structures,which can measure electrical properties of various features or layers(e.g., contact or via resistance, metal layer sheet resistance), orindicate the presence of manufacturing defects by testing for shortsbetween, for example, gate or metal structures having minimum featuresizes or other layout patterns of concern.

Any number of SEM images can be generated per wafer. SEM images can betaken of one or more portions of an individual die, for various die onthe wafer. For example, an SEM image be taken of the gate layer in aregion where the gate patterns are particularly dense (such as in amemory array), and for representative die distributed across the waferto capture intra-wafer manufacturing processing variations. SEM imagescan be taken at any point in the manufacturing process. As SEM imagescan capture of field of view that is hundreds of microns in length andwidth, each image can contain many instances of critical features to bemonitored.

Silicon data 420 can be generated for each wafer that is processedduring process development or monitoring and can be generated for wafersprocessed across fabrication facilities in order to evaluatecross-facility manufacturing robustness. Given today's large wafersizes, the complexities of modern processing technologies, and wafer runrates, the amount of silicon data that can produced can be tremendous.The number of SEM images generated during process development alone canreach into the millions.

As will be discussed in further detail below, silicon data 420 can besupplied to a semantic pattern extraction system 430 that digests thecopious amounts of silicon data and presents to a process engineer orother user 440 information that may useful in process development orimprovement. In some examples, the information provided can be semanticpatterns (phrases or sentences that are easily understandable by ahuman) that suggest which physical design parameters or conditions maybe responsible for causing a defect. In other examples, the system 430can determine one or more design rules that could improve process yieldand update design rule set 450 for the process or update an OPC recipedatabase 460 by updating an existing OPC recipe or creating a new OPCrecipe that could result in improved yield.

As discussed above, modern chips may constitute billions of transistorsand other circuit elements, based on their respective designs.Techniques have been developed to test chips both during design andmanufacturing time, to determine the quality (e.g., yield) of themanufacturing process and/or chip design. Given the enormous number andcomplexity of structures in the chip, it is often prohibitivelyexpensive to test the entirety of a wafer or even the entirety of asingle chip or layer (reticle) of a single chip. Accordingly, in manyinstances, testing strategies focus on testing sections, or samples, ofa chip, and inferring or assuming quality based on tests of thesesamples. These (and more involved, comprehensive) tests may be performedin order to identify “problem areas” affecting a particular chip design.For instance, certain portions, or sub-areas (“neighborhoods”) of a chiplayout may be identified as the source of various problems (e.g.,affecting yield results, hardware errors, etc.). For instance, specificelements, or groups of elements, may be identified as the potentialsources of issues affecting a particular chip design, the elementsimplementing utilizing semiconducting fabrication techniques, such asdiscussed above. Accordingly, in some implementations, chip elements,believed to be the source of an issue, may be implemented by definingparticular geometries, polygons, shapes, etc. (also referred to hereinas “features”) to embody the element through the generation ofcorresponding masks to etch/deposit the elements according to thesecorresponding geometric patterns. Indeed, a pattern search (e.g., toidentify a list of all locations in a large layout that match the givengeometric configuration of a particular reference geometry) may play acritical role in many chip design and manufacturing application (e.g.,predicting the impact of a yield-limiter pattern by identifying itsnumber of occurrences in the design).

Various systems may be utilized to test silicon wafers and/or thecomponent chips fabricated thereon to generate silicon data for thewafer and/or chip. For instance, testing may be performed duringfabrication in connection with one or more of the steps of thefabrication process (e.g., masking, etching, polishing, etc.).Corresponding silicon data corresponding to each of these process stepsmay be generated from the tests. Further, functional testing may beperformed, for instance, to test memory components produced on the chip(e.g., for defect density, addressing functionality, etc.), to testinternal circuitry and logic of the chip (e.g., using Joint Test ActionGroup (JTAG) or other testing), among other functional testing.Structural testing may also be performed. Silicon data may be generatedat various points in the manufacturing, packaging, distribution, andimplementation of integrated chips. For instance, package-level testingmay be performed by the supplier to demonstrate initial packageintegrity, board level testing may be performed to take into accountissues identifiable at the circuit board level (e.g., handshaking, RCdelays, etc.), system level testing may be performed to test whether thechip is able to successfully boot a corresponding operating system orother software, and field testing may be performed to test for defectsor performance issues in actual (or emulated) end user configurations,among other examples. Testing and the resulting silicon data may beutilized to determine yield (e.g., at the wafer level) corresponding toa particular chip design and layout to be repeatedly printed on a wafer.For instance, yield may represent the proportion of “good” chips (e.g.,chips determined to perform at a certain threshold of quality) to theoverall number of the chips printed on the wafer.

In some implementations, testing (including yield testing) may identifyparticular features or patterns (e.g., groupings of geometric featuresin or comprising a neighborhood) that may be responsible for certainresults identified in the silicon data. For instance, functional orstructural defects may be determined to occur at higher frequencies inparticular neighborhoods, where the presence of certain geometricfeatures or patterns are found. While such information may beparticularly helpful in improving yield and making adjustments in chipsdeveloped according to these known designs, as new chip designs aredeveloped (at pre-manufacturing design time) corresponding silicon datais not available. Manufacturing test versions of a chip design solely totest the design's viability may be unrealistic and prohibitivelyexpensive and nonetheless provide limited test results from which designimprovements may be made, among other shortcomings.

Prediction of a new chip design's ultimate functional response andquality early in the development phase of the chip may be particularlyvalue, allowing chip designers to make critical and yield-improvingmodifications to the chip before committing the design to silicon. In animproved system, predictive analysis of a chip design may be performedusing machine learning models trained on historical silicon data.However, prediction based on historical silicon data may be difficultwhen the input data spans across multiple domains. For example, duringthe research and development phase of manufacturing for a newsemiconductor device, it is critical to identify the yield limitingpatterns and regions so that sufficient time can be allotted to rectifythe process and/or design of any identified yield limiting layoutpattern(s). The historical data for such yield limiters may spanmultiple domains that include SEM pictures, response of optical setup oflithography machines, physical resist response, and etch behavior, amongother examples. Moreover, it is necessary to have a good predictabilityof the overall difficulty in achieving maximum yield for a given device.An improved machine learning system may be utilized to address at leastsome of these example challenges.

Turning to FIG. 5, a simplified block diagram 500 is shown illustratingan example system 505, which may enable improved analysis of chip layoutdata to predict yield limiting aspects of the design, as well asidentify issues, which may arise at each of a series of manufacturingprocess steps based on a machine learning models trained from an arrayof historical silicon data (e.g., generated from testing, at multipleprocess steps and points in the lifecycles and applications of multipledifferent manufactured chip designs). For instance, an improved machinelearning system 505 may utilize silicon data (e.g., 420) generated byone or more testing systems (e.g., 510) to train and develop supervisedlearning models (e.g., 550), which may be utilized to predict theperformance of various new chip designs and serve as a basis formodifying and improving these chip designs. Metrics and results derivedfrom the machine learning system 505 for a new chip design may beutilized, in some implementations, to tune and control fabricationsystems (e.g., 515) that are to perform fabrication steps to manufacturechips based on the new chip design.

In one example, a machine learning system 505 may be implemented usingone or more data processing devices (e.g., 516), one or moremachine-readable memory elements (e.g., 518), among other componentsimplemented in hardware and/or software to realize computer-implementedlogic of the machine learning system 505. For instance, a machinelearning engine 520 may be implemented to execute a set of supervisedmachine learning models (e.g., 550) based on historical silicon data(e.g., 420). For instance, the set of supervised machine learning modelsmay include a set of random forest models 550. One or more respectiverandom forest models 550 may be developed and trained for each ofmultiple different fabrication process steps to generate predictions foran input describing a portion of, or pattern within, a new chip layoutdesign relevant to that processing step. The machine learning engine 520may include logic to implement a random forest engine 535 to performoperations defined in a corresponding random forest model to implementand generate results from the random forest model. In someimplementations, a random forest model may generate discrete predictionvalues. In other implementations, predictions may yield continuous(rather than discrete) values, by including linear regression sub-modelswithin the random forest models 550, such as discussed herein.Accordingly, a linear regression engine 540 may also be provided toperform operations corresponding with linear regression sub-modelsincluded in some random forest models. A voting engine 545 may also beprovided to apply a designated voting algorithm to the outputs of eachof the decision trees in the ensemble random forest model (e.g., 550) todetermine a result for the random forest model, among other examplemodules and logic.

In some implementations, inputs to random forest models 550 may bedefined to include a particular set of features of a selected patternwithin a new chip design layout. In some instances, the set of featuresmay be extracted manually and fed as an input (e.g., a feature vectordefined in feature data 560) to the corresponding random forest model.In other instances, a machine learning system (or sub-system) mayinclude a feature extraction engine 525 to take, as an input, at leastthe portion of the chip layout data describing the subject pattern(e.g., pattern data 580) and parse the chip layout data (e.g., imagedata) to automatically determine the requisite set of features to beused as an input for a particular one (or each respective one) of theset of random forest models 550. In some implementations, a featureextraction engine may be programmed to identify a particular set offeatures predetermined based on an analysis of the historical resultdata. For instance, a particular subset of features may be detected aslikely having relevance to the classifications, or results, to bepredicted using a particular random forest model. Accordingly, a featureextraction engine (e.g., 525) may be programmed to detect, for theparticular random forest model, the particular subset of featuresdetermined to be relevant to the subject of the particular random forestmodel. The same or separate feature extraction engines may be programmedto detect other subsets of features determined to be germane to otherrandom forest models. In some implementations, machine learningalgorithms may be utilized to automatically detect and extract thesedesired features from various source data (e.g., SEM image data, thermalheat map images, etc.), among other example implementations.

Random forest models 550 may be trained using training data 555 derivedfrom silicon data 420 describing previously designed and fabricatedchips. In some implementations, an example machine learning system 505may include a model trainer 530. In other instances, a model trainer maybe provided separate from the system hosting the machine learning engine(e.g., 520), among other alternative implementations. A model trainer530 possesses computer-driven logic to train each of the set of randomforest models 550 using corresponding training data 555. For instance,different training data may be generated for use in each of the set ofrandom forest models 550 and may be based on various portions of thesilicon data 420 available from historical chip designs. In someimplementations, training data 555 may identify both geometric featuresof the chip designs from which silicon data 420 was generated, as wellas identify attributes detected through testing of these historicalchips (e.g., by testing systems (e.g., 510)) and described in theresulting silicon data 420. The trees within the random forest models550 may be randomly generated an include nodes that determine whether aninput includes certain geometric features or not. The training of therandom forest models may be supervised by providing the attributesdescribed in the silicon data pertaining to historical chips'performance and yield results as observed during testing of thesehistorical chips. Accordingly, through training, geometriccharacteristics of historical chips, or of various neighborhoods orpatterns present within these historical chips' layouts, may bedetermined, through training, to correlate with certain performance,process outcomes, or yield-related results. As such, a trained randomforest model (e.g., 550) may then be used to test new, development-phasechip design patterns to identify potentially problematic patterns andpredict yield outcomes and manufacturing process outcomes for the newchip design.

For instance, assessing the quality and predicting potential problems ina chip design is a complex multi-domain problem. The principles andsolutions described herein may be extended or modified to apply to othermulti-domain problems encountered in other state-of-the-artmanufacturing processes. In cases of chip manufacturing, determining anaccurate estimate of wafer or mask health traditionally required complexlithographic simulations to predict the average expected behavior of aparticular pattern as well as the variations to this average behaviordue to imperfect manufacturing conditions that include imperfect maskmanufacturing, variable site-to-site nature of the photoresist, the dosevariations, the stepper lens imperfections, the etch process variations,poor image contrast, and other factors. While the lithographic communityin general has focused substantial research on predicting the averagebehavior of a given pattern to develop quality optical proximitycorrection (OPC) modeling and simulation procedures to predict patternsthat are difficult to image. However, OPC modeling is but one aspect ofthe lithography process and numerous other factors may impact yield. Forinstance, accurate prediction on the variability component of a patternhas remain difficult due to lack of new-device specific data duringearly stages of process development.

In some implementations, the nodes of example random forest trees may beformed to identify prime geometric modulators that along with theprocess variations cause the largest impact on the resultant health ofthe wafer (upon which a chip design is to be etched). Using supervisedlearning algorithms that employ micro-level (e.g., data associated witheach geometric pattern) historical silicon data from earlier devicemanufacturing, machine learning models are built. Given any pattern(even previously not seen) from a chip design as an input, these trainedrandom forest models 550 can identify which patterns manufactured in thepast (among many millions of choices) behave a relevant way and use thishistorical knowledge to predict how the geometry within these newpatterns can affect the variability of resultant features.

For instance, for a new chip design pattern, a relevant feature set maybe determined representing the defining characteristics of the patterns,such as the width and height of polygons within the pattern, themirror-invariant neighboring distances of one or more reference polygonsin the pattern to other neighboring polygons (e.g., to the nearestneighboring polygon in each of eight cardinal directions), the width andheights of all neighboring polygons detected to be within a giventhreshold distance from the reference polygon, density of geometrywithin the pattern neighborhood, the shape and angles employed in thepolygon(s), the longest and shortest sides of the polygon(s), amongother examples. These characteristics and metrics defining a givenpatterns characteristics may be embodied as a feature set, or featurevector, to be supplied as an input to the random forest model.Similarly, training data may be generated from historical silicon data420 by identifying similar defining characteristics of micro-levelpatterns within the corresponding chips' respective layout designs. Insome cases, the training data 555 may be thereby represent a large anddiverse array of observed data points (which may differ over time,location, tool or specific process used).

As further shown in the example of FIG. 5, a machine learning system505, in some embodiments, may interface with other systems, such astesting systems (e.g., 510) and fabrication systems (e.g., 515). In someimplementations, one or more of such systems may be implemented ondistinct physical computing systems, which may be interconnected by oneor more wired or wireless networks (e.g., 520). In one example, atesting system 510 may be implemented using one or more data processingdevices (e.g., 516), one or more machine-readable memory elements (e.g.,518), among other components implemented in hardware and/or software torealize computer-implemented logic of the testing system 510. A varietyof different testing systems may be provided to test various aspects ofa chip as it undergoes various processing steps performed by variousfabrication tools. A testing system 510 may therefore include a testingengine 565 adapted to the testing of a wafer and/or chip(s) at orfollowing a corresponding process step. Corresponding silicon data 420may be generated from the testing. In some instances, an expansivecollection of silicon data 420 may be generated for certain models orruns of chips (e.g., corresponding to the fabrication and testing ofpotentially millions of versions of the chip). Similarly, formanufacturers developing multiple different chips or generations ofchips, a deep and diverse array of silicon data may be generated by thatmanufacturer for a similarly diverse collection of chip designs.Additionally, in some implementations, a repository of silicon data maybe made available from multiple manufacturers, allowing an even morediversified collection of silicon data, among other examples.

Results returned by the machine learning system 505 representingpredicted results or attributes from fabrication of a chip design, basedon one or a collection of input patterns (e.g., representing micro-levelsubsections of the overall chip layout) may be generated, and in somecases, compiled to be used as inputs to other systems involved in thedesign, masking, and eventual manufacture of the chip design. Forinstance, an example fabrication system (e.g., 515) may include processcontrol subsystems and tools (e.g., 570), which may be implemented usingcorresponding machine-executable code stored in memory (e.g., 568) andexecuted by one or more data processors (e.g., 566). A fabricationsystem 515 may utilize pattern data 580 defining a particular chiplayout to control the performance of various lithography process steps.Pattern data 580 may represent corrected, modified, or optimizedversions of an original chip layout, which was modified based on resultsderived from the original chip layout patterns being provided as inputsto one or more machine learning models (e.g., 550). Likewise, parameterdata 575 may be utilized by a process control tool 570 to dictate themanner in which a particular process step should be carried out.Parameter data 575 may also be based on or derived from results ofanalyses performed for a corresponding chip design using machinelearning models (e.g., 550), such as introduced herein. For instance, arandom forest model generated to corresponding to a polish step may beutilized to determine, for a particular chip design, the duration orpressure to apply during a polish step with wafers including theparticular chip design, among a myriad of other examples.

In some implementations, the systems discussed herein (e.g., 505, 510,515) may be implemented as a computer device, such as a personalcomputing device, mobile computing device, server computing system(e.g., a rack scale, blade server, or other server computer), acomputing system implemented on a tool or other manufacturing machine,among other examples. The system 205 may run an operating system such asWindows, Linux, iOS, Symbian OS, Unix, Android, among other examples.Through such an operating system (or virtual machines or softwarecontainers implemented on the system), the system may have thecapability to run applications locally and/or communicate withapplications that are provided by remote servers in a communicationsnetwork. Such systems may be implemented in a variety of form factorsand embodiments.

Example systems, as illustrated in FIG. 5, may further include one ormultiple computer-accessible memory elements. For instance, memoryelements may be implemented as non-transitory computer readable media,such as flash memory, a magnetic disk drive, an optical drive, aprogrammable read-only memory (PROM), a read-only memory (ROM), or anyother physical memory device or combination of such memory elements.Logic implemented in software can run on a processor capable ofexecuting computer instructions or computer code. The processor mightalso be implemented in hardware using an application specific integratedcircuit (ASIC), programmable logic array (PLA), field programmable gatearray (FPGA), or any other integrated circuit. In some embodiments, asystem may include or be implemented as a system on chip (SOC). In otherembodiments, one or more blocks in a parallel processing device can beimplemented as a separate chip, and the parallel processing device canbe packaged in a system in package (SIP). In some embodiments, at leastsome logic and functionality of a machine (e.g., machine learning system505) may be implemented using one or more hardware accelerator deviceimplementing specialized functionality for use in performing variousoperations used by the system (e.g., by machine learning engine 520),among other example implementations.

Turning to the simplified block diagram 600 of FIG. 6, an example flowis shown for building a set of improved machine learning models for usein performing predictive analytics of a proposed chip design layout. Asillustrated, a collection of different chip designs may be designed andmanufactured (e.g., on a wafer 410) and the wafer 410 may be tested forquality and defects (and overall yield) through a series of testsperformed by one or a suite of testing systems (e.g., 510). Such testsmay be carried out at various phases of the manufacturing process, aswell as following manufacturing (e.g., as the individual chips arepackaged, integrated in computing systems, deployed at customers, etc.).Various silicon data 420 may be generated through each of these tests.As multiple tests of multiple different chip designs may be performed, arich collection of varied silicon data 420 may likewise be generated.Portions of this silicon data may be adapted for use as training data tobe used by a model trainer engine 530 of an example machine learningsystem 505. For instance, various random-forest-based machine learningmodels (e.g., 550) may be developed to correspond to various stages ormanufacturing processes of a chip. Silicon data generated to describequality or attributes of a chip associated with stages and processes maybe parsed to generate corresponding training data. Such training datamay then be provided (e.g., at 620) as inputs to each of the individualtree models (e.g., 610 a-e) embodying a random forest model 550.Training of the tree models may be supervised, with (at least a portionof the) nodes of the individual trees used to identify specificgeometric features of a micro-pattern within a historical chip design,and the output of the tree indicating the observed characteristics forthat historical chip design (e.g., as identified in silicon datagenerated from testing of the resulting historical chip). The set ofdiverse training data derived from the silicon data 420 may be used totrain each of the individual trees 610 a-e in the random forest togenerate a trained version of the random forest model. Outputs of thedecision trees 610 a-e may be fed to a voting block 615 within therandom forest model 550 implementing a particular voting algorithmdefined for the respective random forest model 550 (e.g., weightedvoting, adjusted weight voting, majority voting, regression voting,worst case voting (e.g., for random forests used to predict criticalbehavioral values), etc.). Different random forest models 550 used inthe analysis of a chip design pattern may employ the same or differentvoting algorithm. In some cases, the selection and definition of thevoting algorithm can also be based on corresponding silicon data and maybe refined during training of the model 550 and/or may be based on thetype of value to be output by the respective random forest model.Further, training of the random forest model 550 may be continuous, inthat relevant, newly generated silicon data generated from testing ofadditional chips may be provided to the model trainer 530 on an ongoingbasis to further refine and improve the random forest model 550, amongother example features and implementations.

FIG. 7 is a simplified block diagram 700 including a representation of achip layout 705. A multitude of micro-level patterns (e.g., 710) maymake up the area of the overall chip layout 705. A single pattern 710may include one or multiple elements (e.g., 715, 720, 725, 730, 735) ofvarying geometries. The features determined for the pattern 710 may bebased on the geometries of the collection of elements (e.g., 715, 720,725, 730, 735) within the pattern. Such features may be determinedautomatically by parsing image data of the pattern (e.g., using aconvolutional neural network-based tool or other computer visiontechnology). In some implementations, at least some features of apattern (e.g., 710) may be based on a reference element (e.g., 715)determined for the pattern 710. For instance, a geometrically centermostpolygon (e.g., 715) may be designated as the reference element for thepattern 710. “Neighbor” elements (e.g., 720, 725, 730, 735) may bedefined relative to the reference element 715. For instance, a nearestneighbor of the reference element 715 may be identified in each of theaxis or cardinal directions from the reference element 715 and therespective distances from the reference element 715 to each of theseneighbor elements (e.g., 720, 725, 730, 735) may serve as features ofthe pattern 710, among other example features. For instance, feature ofa pattern may include the sizes and shapes of each of the polygonalelements (e.g., 715, 720, 725, 730, 735) in the pattern, the density ofthe pattern (e.g., what proportion of the overall area of pattern isoccupied by such elements), three-dimensional aspects of the elements,among other examples. Values may be defined to correspond to each of theobserved features in the pattern and a corresponding feature vector maybe defined.

In some cases, the size of the pattern may be based on theclassifications to be performed using a corresponding random forestmodel. For instance, some attributes of a chip design in a particularmanufacturing process may be at a micro-level (e.g., a nanometer level)such as deposition, etching, and masking processes, while otherprocesses are at a longer-range level (e.g., polishing). Accordingly,classifications involving attributes at the micro-level may bedetermined using random forest models that are trained on and acceptfeature data describing a smaller-dimensioned pattern, whilelonger-range classifications are determined using random forest modelsthat are trained on and accept feature data describinglarger-dimensioned patterns, and so on.

FIG. 7 additionally shows an example simplified decision tree 610,representing an individual tree, which may be included within a randomforest model. The tree 610 may include a collection of interconnectednodes (e.g., 740 a-d, 745 a-e). Test nodes (e.g., 740 a-d) eachrepresent a test on a particular (randomly-selected) attribute. Suchattributes may be geometric, corresponding to geometric features in thefeature vector input. For instance, a test node may test a given inputpattern for the presence of a polygon (e.g., 715, 720, 725, 730, 735)with particular dimensions, shape, or other particular geometriccharacteristic. If the pattern (e.g., 710) includes the attribute, acorresponding branch is followed to a next node, until a leaf node(e.g., 745 a-e) is reached. Each leaf node 745 a-e may hold a classlabel to identify a result of the tree 610 (based on the outcomes of thepreceding test nodes (e.g., 740 a-d). Generally, on a trained decisiontree (e.g., 610), certain classification results may be determined tocorrespond to various combinations of geometrical (and other)attributes, as determined based on the historical silicon data. As aninput pattern is determined to include more of these geometricalattributes, the input pattern may be more likely classified as beingassociated with the attributes or outcomes associated with theseclassification results. For instance, a particular random forest modelmay be defined to predict performance of a chip pattern during adeposition step. During training, it may be determined that historicalpatterns with elements of a certain dimension and shape are more likelyto result in defects during deposition, negatively impacting yield.Accordingly, when a new chip layout pattern is presented as an input,decision trees in the random forest may be expected to similarlyclassify the input pattern as having a greater likelihood of negativedeposition results, among other examples.

Turning to FIGS. 8A-8B, simplified block diagrams 800 a-b is shownillustrating an example set of random forest models, which may bedeveloped to generate a set of predictions for use in development andmanufacturing of a sample chip layout. For instance, in FIG. 8A, therespective training of a set of random forest models (e.g., 550 a-550 d)is represented. As introduced above, various silicon data (e.g., 420a-c) may be generated from testing of historical chips in connectionwith various process steps (e.g., lithography processes such as masking,deposition, etching, polishing, etc.). For instance, tests (e.g., 605a-c) may be performed in connection with various process steps (e.g.,Processes A, B, and C). Likewise, a collection of multiple differentrandom forest models (e.g., 550 a-d) may be developed, which are eachused to predict attributes of particular process step(s) being performedon a wafer incorporating chips with design layouts that include one ormore instances of a reference pattern (provided as an input to therandom forest model). Indeed, multiple random forest models (e.g., 550 cand 550 d) to predict multiple different attributes or qualities thatmay be expected for a given chip design pattern as it relates to acorresponding process (e.g., Process C). Accordingly, training dataderived for these random forest models (e.g., 550 a-d) may be preparedor generated from the collection of historical data (e.g., 420 a-c)describing historical chips' attributes associated with thecorresponding process-related test (e.g., 605 a-c). This training datamay then be used to train the corresponding process-related randomforest model(s) (e.g., 550 a-d). As an example, silicon data 420 c,generated from testing 605 c corresponding to a fabrication process Cmay be the serve as the basis of historical training data to be used totrain those random forest models (e.g., 550 c, 550 d), which predictattributes relating to process C (e.g., for new chip layout patterns),among other examples.

Turning to FIG. 8B, upon training the individual process-related randomforest models 550 a-d using training data derived from correspondingprocess-related sensor data, the models 550 a-d may be used (e.g.,executed by a machine learning engine) to determine correspondingprocess-related characteristics (e.g., 805 a-d) for new chip layoutdesigns. For instance, layout data 580 may be provided to the machinelearning system as an input. Layout data 580, in some cases, maydescribe only a select pattern within the total layout of a chip reticle(e.g., covering a sub-area at the nanometer or micron level andincluding only a miniscule sampling of the potentially trillions ofelements in the chip design). In some implementations, the layout data580 may be a graphical representation of the chip layout portion. Inother cases, the layout data 580 may describe features of the chiplayout portion (e.g., as feature data, such as a feature vector). Insome implementations (such as illustrated in FIG. 8B), a machinelearning system may automatically parse image layout data andautomatically determine relevant features of the portion of the layoutimage for inclusion in a feature vector input adapted for a respectiveone of the available machine learning models used to predict performanceof lithography process steps involving the proposed layout portion. Forinstance, different feature vectors (e.g., 560 a-560 c) may be derivedfrom the same layout data 580 using a feature extraction tool 525. Forinstance, machine learning model 550 a may take, as an input, a firstfeature vector 560 a including values for a first set of features. Thisset of features may pertain to a set of features considered ordetermined to be of importance in determining a correspondingcharacteristic (e.g., 805 a). Additional feature vectors 560 b, 560 c)may be determined to correspond to other machine learning models (e.g.,550 b-d). In some instances, the same feature vector (e.g., 560 c),describing geometric features of a given layout pattern, may be providedto multiple different machine learning models (e.g., 550 c, 550 d),including two random forest models generated for two differentlithography process steps, among other examples.

Continuing with the example of FIG. 8B, process-related random forestmodels (e.g., 550 a-d) may each receive inputs (e.g., 560 a-c)describing features of the same chip layout. Some inputs may be featurevectors describing a layout pattern for the chip incorporating a firstsub-area of the layout while other inputs are feature vectors describingother layout patterns incorporating other (e.g., smaller or larger)sub-areas of the layout, among other examples (e.g., where the samepattern and same feature vector is used for multiple different randomforest models relating to different respective process steps). Therespective trained random forest models (e.g., 550 a-d) may then returnclassification results for the inputs to identify a characteristicrelated to the corresponding process step. For instance, various typesof characteristics (e.g., 805 a-d) may be communicated through therespective results of different random forest models (e.g., 550 a-d). Asexamples, a random forest model may be configured to return a result toindicate a predicted defect rate, a predicted yield limiting value, aparameter to be applied during the process to yield a successfuloutcome, a critical dimension for the polygons in the layout, a minimumpermissible distance between neighboring polygons, a maximum densityvalue, among other examples. Indeed, through a suite of different randomforest models (e.g., 550 a-d) a collection of valuable predictions maybe generated fora proposed chip layout to provide designers with a morecomprehensive view of how the layout may perform at each of the specificsteps of the lithography process and what adjustments may be made toimprove the predicted yield. Likewise, multiple different patterns ofthe same chip layout may be provided as inputs to the suite of randomforest models to obtain a more complete view of how the overall layoutis likely to fair during manufacturing.

Turning to FIG. 9, a simplified block diagram 900 is shown illustratingan example of training a random forest using historical silicon data. Inthis example, a set of silicon data 420, which itself may represent onlya portion of the overall silicon data available, may be selected asrelevant for training a particular random forest model 550 (e.g., basedon both the silicon data and the random forest relating to a particularchip manufacturing process). In this example, each constituent tree(e.g., 610 a-610 n) may be trained on a random sample (e.g., 905, 910,915, 920) of the set of silicon data 420. Accordingly, differentportions, or samples (e.g., 905, 910, 915, 920) may be used to train thedifferent trees. For instance, different samples may incorporate silicondata describing testing of different historical chips and relate todifferent attributes of these chips. The respective test nodes (or“split decision”) (e.g., 925, 930, etc.) in the constituent trees (e.g.,610 a-610 n) may likewise use a random sample of the overall featuresdetermined for chip layouts. For instance, various random foresttraining algorithms may be applied to determine the respective hyperparameters (e.g., parameters that affect the outcome the most) for therandom forest model, for instance, by using cross-validation methods onthe training data and measuring the correlation of these parameters onthe training set. In some examples, a re-training of thehyper-parameters may be performed using the entire training set tocomplete the generation of the random forest model. In someimplementations, a portion of historical silicon data may be utilizedfor training, while a remaining (e.g., smaller) portion is held back asvalidation data, among other examples.

Turning to FIG. 10, a simplified block diagram 1000 is shownillustrating the example use of a trained version of the random forestmodel 550 illustrated in the example of FIG. 9. For instance, an input xmay be provided to each of the constituent trees (e.g., 610 a-610 n),the input representing a feature vector determined for a particular chipdesign pattern. A predicted behavior (e.g., relating to a correspondingprocess step associated with the random forest model) may thereby bedetermined for the pattern. Indeed, in order to predict the behavior ofpatterns that have not yet before been seen, each individual tree (e.g.,610 a-610 n) in the random forest 550 may process the input features andsuggests a value (e.g., y₁ to y_(n)) independently based on the input x.A vote aggregator block for the random forest takes the outputs of theindividual trees and generates an end value for the output for thepattern based on the individual votes (e.g., based on the particularvoting scheme employed at the random forest model).

Turning to the simplified block diagram 1100 of FIG. 11, as introducedabove, the value of the attribute(s) determined by some random forestmodels may be discrete (even binary) values. In other cases, the randomforest model may be intended to determine a continuous value. Forinstance, as shown in FIG. 11, if the particular application requires asmooth response curve (and no discontinuous changes between closelyrelated input points), a respective multi-variable regression model(e.g., 1105 a-j) may be created for each branch of each of theconstituent trees (e.g., 610) of the random forest model used todetermine this value. For instance, a linear regression model (e.g.,1105 a-j) may be provided at each leaf node of each of the trees (e.g.,610), with each tree then providing the resulting value of the linearregression model as its vote to the vote aggregator block provided forthe random forest model.

FIG. 12 is a simplified flowchart 1200 showing an example technique forutilizing an example machine learning model to predict the outcome(s) ofone or more chip fabrication processes were they to be applied to aproposed chip layout. For instance, the machine learning model mayinclude a random forest model, which may be trained 1205 using trainingdata that incorporates information from silicon data generated fromtesting associated with the fabrication of previous, historical chipshaving chip layout designs different from the proposed chip layoutdesign. An input may be provided, or received 1210, at the trainedrandom forest model, which describes features of a pattern within theproposed chip layout, the pattern representing a micro-level sub-area ofthe overall layout design. The input may be provided to each constituenttree within the random forest and each tree may generate 1215 arespective result. The results may be utilized in a voting scheme togenerate 1220 an aggregated, or final, result of the random forest modelfor the input. The result may identify a predicted attribute relating tothe potential fabrication of a chip that incorporates the proposed chiplayout, among other example features.

While the foregoing discussion has focused on the application of randomforest models to predict aspects of new semiconductor chip layouts, itshould be appreciated that the solutions discussed above may be appliedin other fields of endeavor, without diverting from the generalprinciples discussed herein. As one example, geographic map and/ortopology data describing streets, buildings, topological changes, trees,bodies of water, etc. may be utilized as training data (e.g., maps ofvarious places throughout the world) and attributes of that geographicenvironment (e.g., pollution, traffic, climate, etc.) may serve toprovide supervised learning of a set of random forest models. Other mapdata (e.g., image data, aerial LIDAR data, satellite data, etc.)describing other places (e.g., for which the attributes may not be aswell studied) may be provided and relevant features extracted and fed asinputs to the set of the random forest models to yield predictiveattributes for this other place. Other examples, such as the analysis ofnonotechnology structures, biological structures, and other samples mayalso be enhanced using solutions similar to those discussed herein,among other example applications.

FIGS. 13-14 are block diagrams of exemplary computer architectures thatmay be used in accordance with embodiments disclosed herein. Forinstance, the computer architectures shown in these examples may beutilized to implement or execute an improved compiler and/or a portionof a target computing device. In other examples, the computerarchitectures shown in these examples may consume results generated bythe neural network, provide data for use as inputs to the neuralnetworks, among other cooperative uses. It should be appreciated thatother computer architecture designs known in the art for processors andcomputing systems may also be used. Generally, suitable computerarchitectures for embodiments disclosed herein can include, but are notlimited to, configurations illustrated in FIGS. 13-14.

FIG. 13 is an example illustration of a processor according to anembodiment.

Processor 1300 is an example of a type of hardware device that can beused in connection with the implementations above. Processor 1300 may beany type of processor, such as a microprocessor, an embedded processor,a digital signal processor (DSP), a network processor, a multi-coreprocessor, a single core processor, or other device to execute code.Although only one processor 1300 is illustrated in FIG. 13, a processingelement may alternatively include more than one of processor 1300illustrated in FIG. 13. Processor 1300 may be a single-threaded core or,for at least one embodiment, the processor 1300 may be multi-threaded inthat it may include more than one hardware thread context (or “logicalprocessor”) per core.

FIG. 13 also illustrates a memory 1302 coupled to processor 1300 inaccordance with an embodiment. Memory 1302 may be any of a wide varietyof memories (including various layers of memory hierarchy) as are knownor otherwise available to those of skill in the art. Such memoryelements can include, but are not limited to, random access memory(RAM), read only memory (ROM), logic blocks of a field programmable gatearray (FPGA), erasable programmable read only memory (EPROM), andelectrically erasable programmable ROM (EEPROM).

Processor 1300 can execute any type of instructions associated withalgorithms, processes, or operations detailed herein. Generally,processor 1300 can transform an element or an article (e.g., data) fromone state or thing to another state or thing.

Code 1304, which may be one or more instructions to be executed byprocessor 1300, may be stored in memory 1302, or may be stored insoftware, hardware, firmware, or any suitable combination thereof, or inany other internal or external component, device, element, or objectwhere appropriate and based on particular needs. In one example,processor 1300 can follow a program sequence of instructions indicatedby code 1304. Each instruction enters a front-end logic 1306 and isprocessed by one or more decoders 1308. The decoder may generate, as itsoutput, a micro operation such as a fixed width micro operation in apredefined format, or may generate other instructions,microinstructions, or control signals that reflect the original codeinstruction. Front-end logic 1306 also includes register renaming logic1310 and scheduling logic 1312, which generally allocate resources andqueue the operation corresponding to the instruction for execution.

Processor 1300 can also include execution logic 1314 having a set ofexecution units 1316 a, 1316 b, 1316 n, etc. Some embodiments mayinclude a number of execution units dedicated to specific functions orsets of functions. Other embodiments may include only one execution unitor one execution unit that can perform a particular function. Executionlogic 1314 performs the operations specified by code instructions.

After completion of execution of the operations specified by the codeinstructions, back-end logic 1318 can retire the instructions of code1304. In one embodiment, processor 1300 allows out of order executionbut requires in order retirement of instructions. Retirement logic 1320may take a variety of known forms (e.g., re-order buffers or the like).In this manner, processor 1300 is transformed during execution of code1304, at least in terms of the output generated by the decoder, hardwareregisters and tables utilized by register renaming logic 1310, and anyregisters (not shown) modified by execution logic 1314.

Although not shown in FIG. 13, a processing element may include otherelements on a chip with processor 1300. For example, a processingelement may include memory control logic along with processor 1300. Theprocessing element may include I/O control logic and/or may include I/Ocontrol logic integrated with memory control logic. The processingelement may also include one or more caches. In some embodiments,non-volatile memory (such as flash memory or fuses) may also be includedon the chip with processor 1300.

FIG. 14 illustrates a computing system 1400 that is arranged in apoint-to-point (PtP) configuration according to an embodiment. Inparticular, FIG. 14 shows a system where processors, memory, andinput/output devices are interconnected by a number of point-to-pointinterfaces.

Processors 1470 and 1480 may also each include integrated memorycontroller logic (MC) 1472 and 1482 to communicate with memory elements1432 and 1434. Example processors (e.g., 1470, 1480) may include one ormore processor cores (e.g., 1474 a-b, 1448 a-b), which may be coupled torespective cache memory (e.g., 1471, 1482). In alternative embodiments,memory controller logic 1472 and 1482 may be discrete logic separatefrom processors 1470 and 1480. Memory elements 1432 and/or 1434 maystore various data to be used by processors 1470 and 1480 in achievingoperations and functionality outlined herein.

Processors 1470 and 1480 may be any type of processor, such as thosediscussed in connection with other figures. Processors 1470 and 1480 mayexchange data via a point-to-point (PtP) interface 1450 usingpoint-to-point interface circuits 1478 and 1488, respectively.Processors 1470 and 1480 may each exchange data with a chipset 1490 viaindividual point-to-point interfaces 1452 and 1454 using point-to-pointinterface circuits 1476, 1486, 1494, and 1498. Chipset 1490 may alsoexchange data with a co-processor 1438, such as a high-performancegraphics circuit, machine learning accelerator, or other co-processor1438, via an interface 1439, which could be a PtP interface circuit. Inalternative embodiments, any or all of the PtP links illustrated in FIG.14 could be implemented as a multi-drop bus rather than a PtP link.

Chipset 1490 may be in communication with a bus 1420 via an interfacecircuit 1496. Bus 1420 may have one or more devices that communicateover it, such as a bus bridge 1418 and I/O devices 1416. Via a bus 1410,bus bridge 1418 may be in communication with other devices such as auser interface 1412 (such as a keyboard, mouse, touchscreen, or otherinput devices), communication devices 1426 (such as modems, networkinterface devices, or other types of communication devices that maycommunicate through a computer network 1460), audio I/O devices 1414,and/or a data storage device 1428. Data storage device 1428 may storecode 1430, which may be executed by processors 1470 and/or 1480. Inalternative embodiments, any portions of the bus architectures could beimplemented with one or more PtP links.

The computer system depicted in FIG. 14 is a schematic illustration ofan embodiment of a computing system that may be utilized to implementvarious embodiments discussed herein. It will be appreciated thatvarious components of the system depicted in FIG. 14 may be combined ina system-on-a-chip (SoC) architecture or in any other suitableconfiguration capable of achieving the functionality and features ofexamples and implementations provided herein.

While some of the systems and solutions described and illustrated hereinhave been described as containing or being associated with a pluralityof elements, not all elements explicitly illustrated or described may beutilized in each alternative implementation of the present disclosure.Additionally, one or more of the elements described herein may belocated external to a system, while in other instances, certain elementsmay be included within or as a portion of one or more of the otherdescribed elements, as well as other elements not described in theillustrated implementation. Further, certain elements may be combinedwith other components, as well as used for alternative or additionalpurposes in addition to those purposes described herein.

Further, it should be appreciated that the examples presented above arenon-limiting examples provided merely for purposes of illustratingcertain principles and features and not necessarily limiting orconstraining the potential embodiments of the concepts described herein.For instance, a variety of different embodiments can be realizedutilizing various combinations of the features and components describedherein, including combinations realized through the variousimplementations of components described herein. Other implementations,features, and details should be appreciated from the contents of thisSpecification.

Although this disclosure has been described in terms of certainimplementations and generally associated methods, alterations andpermutations of these implementations and methods will be apparent tothose skilled in the art. For example, the actions described herein canbe performed in a different order than as described and still achievethe desirable results. As one example, the processes depicted in theaccompanying figures do not necessarily require the particular ordershown, or sequential order, to achieve the desired results. In certainimplementations, multitasking and parallel processing may beadvantageous. Additionally, other user interface layouts andfunctionality can be supported. Other variations are within the scope ofthe following claims.

While this specification contains many specific implementation details,these should not be construed as limitations on the scope of anyinventions or of what may be claimed, but rather as descriptions offeatures specific to particular embodiments of particular inventions.Certain features that are described in this specification in the contextof separate embodiments can also be implemented in combination in asingle embodiment. Conversely, various features that are described inthe context of a single embodiment can also be implemented in multipleembodiments separately or in any suitable subcombination. Moreover,although features may be described above as acting in certaincombinations and even initially claimed as such, one or more featuresfrom a claimed combination can in some cases be excised from thecombination, and the claimed combination may be directed to asubcombination or variation of a subcombination.

Similarly, while operations are depicted in the drawings in a particularorder, this should not be understood as requiring that such operationsbe performed in the particular order shown or in sequential order, orthat all illustrated operations be performed, to achieve desirableresults. In certain circumstances, multitasking and parallel processingmay be advantageous. Moreover, the separation of various systemcomponents in the embodiments described above should not be understoodas requiring such separation in all embodiments, and it should beunderstood that the described program components and systems cangenerally be integrated together in a single software product orpackaged into multiple software products.

The following examples pertain to embodiments in accordance with thisSpecification. Example 1 is a machine-readable storage medium withinstructions stored thereon, where the instructions are executable by amachine to cause the machine to: receive an input at a machine learningmodel, where the input describes a pattern within a particular chiplayout, the machine learning model includes a random forest modeltrained using training data based on a plurality of sets of silicondata, each of the sets of silicon data describe attributes observed inassociation with previous fabrication of other chip layouts, and thetraining data further describes geometric features of the correspondingother chip layouts, where the random forest model includes a pluralityof decision tree models and a voting block to implement a particularvoting algorithm, and the other chip layouts are different from theparticular chip layout; generate results at each of the plurality ofdecision tree models, where the results identify predicted attributesfor the pattern associated with fabrication of the particular chiplayout; and perform a vote using the voting block to determine, from theresults, an output of the machine learning model, where the outputidentifies a predicted attribute of the pattern of the particular chiplayout.

Example 2 may include the subject matter of example 1, where the machinelearning model corresponds to a particular step in a chip fabricationprocess and the output includes a predicted attribute for the patterncorresponding to the particular step.

Example 3 may include the subject matter of example 2, where theplurality of sets of silicon data include silicon data generated from atest associated with the particular step and the silicon data describesattributes observed for the other chip layouts based on performance ofthe particular step on the other chip layouts.

Example 4 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 2-3,where the machine learning model includes one of a plurality of machinelearning models, and the plurality of machine learning models includeanother random forest model trained with training data based on silicondata associated with another step in the chip fabrication process, wherethe other random forest model is to generate an output to identify apredicted attribute associated with the other step.

Example 5 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 1-4,where the input includes a feature set of the pattern and the featureset includes features of geometric elements present within the pattern.

Example 6 may include the subject matter of example 5, where thefeatures of geometric elements include one or more of sizes of thegeometric elements, shapes of the geometric elements, and distancesbetween the geometric elements.

Example 7 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 5-6,where each of the plurality of decision tree models includes arespective set of test nodes and a respective set of leaf nodes, whereat least a portion of each of the set of test nodes are to test whetherthe pattern includes a particular geometric feature.

Example 8 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 5-7,where the input includes a feature vector to specify the feature set.

Example 9 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 5-8,where the instructions are further executable to cause the machine toparse a graphical representation of the pattern to determine the featureset.

Example 10 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 1-9,where the particular chip layout is for a pre-fabrication version of achip.

Example 11 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 1-10,where each of the plurality of decision tree models includes arespective set of test nodes and a respective set of leaf nodes and alinear regression model is attached to each of the leaf nodes, where thelinear regression model is to generate a continuous value as an outputof the respective decision tree model.

Example 12 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 1-11,where the predicted attribute includes an attribute to be applied duringperformance of a fabrication process to manufacture a chip with theparticular chip layout.

Example 13 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 1-12,where the input includes a first input, the pattern includes a firstpattern representing a first sub-area of the particular chip layout, andthe instructions are further executable to cause the machine to: receivea second input describing a different second pattern in the particularchip layout; and generate another output from the machine learning modelbased on the second input.

Example 14 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 1-13,where the instructions are further executable to cause the machine totrain the machine learning model with the training data, and training ofthe machine learning model includes supervised training based on resultsof testing described in the plurality of sets of silicon data.

Example 15 is a method including: receiving an input at a machinelearning model, where the input describes a pattern within a particularchip layout, the machine learning model includes a random forest modeltrained using training data based on a plurality of sets of silicondata, each of the sets of silicon data describe processing attributesobserved in association with previous fabrication processes involvingother chip layouts, and the training data further describes geometricfeatures of the corresponding to other chip layouts, where the randomforest model includes a plurality of decision tree models and a votingblock to implement a particular voting algorithm, and the other chiplayouts are different from the particular chip layout; generatingresults at each of the plurality of decision tree models, where theresults identify predicted processing attributes for the pattern; andperforming a vote using the voting block to determine, from the results,an output of the machine learning model, where the output identifies apredicted attribute of the pattern of the particular chip layout.

Example 16 may include the subject matter of example 15, where themachine learning model corresponds to a particular step in a chipfabrication process and the output includes a predicted attribute forthe pattern corresponding to the particular step.

Example 17 may include the subject matter of example 16, where theplurality of sets of silicon data include silicon data generated from atest associated with the particular step and the silicon data describesattributes observed for the other chip layouts based on performance ofthe particular step on the other chip layouts.

Example 18 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 16-17,where the machine learning model includes one of a plurality of machinelearning models, and the plurality of machine learning models includeanother random forest model trained with training data based on silicondata associated with another step in the chip fabrication process, wherethe other random forest model is to generate an output to identify apredicted attribute associated with the other step.

Example 19 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 16-18,where the input includes a feature set of the pattern and the featureset includes features of geometric elements present within the pattern.

Example 20 may include the subject matter of example 19, where thefeatures of geometric elements include one or more of sizes of thegeometric elements, shapes of the geometric elements, and distancesbetween the geometric elements.

Example 21 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 19-20,where each of the plurality of decision tree models includes arespective set of test nodes and a respective set of leaf nodes, whereat least a portion of each of the set of test nodes are to test whetherthe pattern includes a particular geometric feature.

Example 22 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 19-21,where the input includes a feature vector to specify the feature set.

Example 23 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 19-22,further including parsing a graphical representation of the pattern todetermine the feature set.

Example 24 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 19-23,where the particular chip layout is for a pre-fabrication version of achip.

Example 25 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 15-24,where each of the plurality of decision tree models includes arespective set of test nodes and a respective set of leaf nodes and alinear regression model is attached to each of the leaf nodes, where thelinear regression model is to generate a continuous value as an outputof the respective decision tree model.

Example 26 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 15-25,where the predicted attribute includes an attribute to be applied duringperformance of a fabrication process to manufacture a chip with theparticular chip layout.

Example 27 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 15-26,where the input includes a first input, the pattern includes a firstpattern representing a first sub-area of the particular chip layout, andthe method further includes: receiving a second input describing adifferent second pattern in the particular chip layout; and generatinganother output from the machine learning model based on the secondinput.

Example 28 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 15-27,further including training the machine learning model with the trainingdata, and training of the machine learning model includes supervisedtraining based on results of testing described in the plurality of setsof silicon data.

Example 29 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 15-28,further including performing additional training of the machine learningmodel using new silicon data to revise the random forest model.

Example 30 is a system including means to perform the method of any oneof examples 15-29.

Example 31 is a system including: at least one data processor; a memory;and a machine learning engine, executable by the data processor to:access a particular machine learning model, where the particular machinelearning model includes a random forest model trained based on aplurality of sets of silicon data generated from tests of previouslyfabricated chips; provide an input to the random forest model, where theinput includes a feature set of a pattern within a particular chiplayout, and the feature set identifies geometric attributes of polygonalelements within the pattern; and generate a result at the random forestmodel based on the input, where the result identifies a predictedattribute of the pattern based on the plurality of sets of silicon data,and the result is generated based at least in part on determining,within the random forest model, that geometric attributes of the patternwere included in the previously fabricated chips, where the previouslyfabricated chips have chip layouts different from the particular chiplayout.

Example 32 may include the subject matter of example 31, where thememory stores a plurality of machine learning models including theparticular machine learning model, and each of the plurality of machinelearning models is configured to predict a different attribute for achip layout relating to fabrication of a chip including the chip layout.

Example 33 may include the subject matter of example 32, where thedifferent attributes include attributes relating to different steps in achip fabrication process.

Example 34 may include the subject matter of example 32, where theplurality of machine learning models include some random forest modelsconfigured to generate discrete result values and other random forestmodels configured to generate continuous result values, where the otherrandom forest models include linear regression models at each respectivedecision tree within the corresponding random forest model to generatethe corresponding continuous result value.

Example 35 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 31-34,further including a model trainer executable by the data processor totrain the random forest model using training data derived from theplurality of sets of silicon data.

Example 36 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 31-35,where the input includes a feature set of the pattern and the featureset includes features of geometric elements present within the pattern.

Example 37 may include the subject matter of example 36, where thefeatures of geometric elements include one or more of sizes of thegeometric elements, shapes of the geometric elements, and distancesbetween the geometric elements.

Example 38 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 36-37,where each of the plurality of decision tree models includes arespective set of test nodes and a respective set of leaf nodes, whereat least a portion of each of the set of test nodes are to test whetherthe pattern includes a particular geometric feature.

Example 39 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 36-38,where the input includes a feature vector to specify the feature set.

Example 40 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 36-39,further including parsing a graphical representation of the pattern todetermine the feature set.

Example 41 may include the subject matter of any one of examples 31-40,where the particular chip layout is for a pre-fabrication version of achip.

Example 42 is a method including: receiving an input at a machinelearning model, wherein the input describes a pattern within aparticular mapping, the machine learning model comprises a random forestmodel trained using training data based on a plurality of sets ofanalysis data, each of the sets of analysis data describe attributesobserved in association with an analysis of other mappings, and thetraining data further describes geometric features of the correspondingother mappings, wherein the random forest model comprises a plurality ofdecision tree models and a voting block to implement a particular votingalgorithm, and the other mappings are different from the particularmapping; generating results at each of the plurality of decision treemodels, where the results identify predicted attributes for the patternassociated with fabrication of the particular chip layout; andperforming a vote using the voting block to determine, from the results,an output of the machine learning model, where the output identifies apredicted attribute of the pattern of the particular mapping.

Example 43 includes the subject matter of example 42, wherein theparticular mapping comprises a geographic map of a first area and theother mappings comprise respective geographic maps of a plurality ofother areas, the plurality of sets of analysis data describe attributesof the plurality of other areas, and the predicted attribute comprises apredicted attribute of the first area.

Example 44 includes the subject matter of example 43, wherein theattributes comprise street traffic attributes.

Example 45 includes the subject matter of example 43, wherein theattributes comprise pollution attributes.

Example 46 includes the subject matter of any one of examples 43-45,wherein the pattern comprises geometry included in the geographic map.

Example 47 includes the subject matter of any one of examples 43-46,wherein the pattern is generated from one of satellite image data oraerial LIDAR data.

Example 48 is a system including means to perform the method of any oneof examples 42-47.

Example 49 includes the subject matter of example 48, where the meansinclude a machine-readable storage medium with instructions storedthereon, the instructions executable to perform at least a portion ofthe method of any one of examples 42-47.

Thus, particular embodiments of the subject matter have been described.Other embodiments are within the scope of the following claims. In somecases, the actions recited in the claims can be performed in a differentorder and still achieve desirable results. In addition, the processesdepicted in the accompanying figures do not necessarily require theparticular order shown, or sequential order, to achieve desirableresults.

What is claimed is:
 1. At least one machine-readable storage medium withinstructions stored thereon, wherein the instructions are executable bya machine to cause the machine to: receive an input at a machinelearning model, wherein the input describes a pattern within aparticular chip layout, the machine learning model comprises a randomforest model trained using training data based on a plurality of sets ofsilicon data, each of the sets of silicon data describe attributesobserved in association with previous fabrication of other chip layouts,and the training data further describes geometric features of thecorresponding other chip layouts, wherein the random forest modelcomprises a plurality of decision tree models and a voting block toimplement a particular voting algorithm, and the other chip layouts aredifferent from the particular chip layout; generate results at each ofthe plurality of decision tree models, wherein the results identifypredicted attributes for the pattern associated with fabrication of theparticular chip layout; and perform a vote using the voting block todetermine, from the results, an output of the machine learning model,wherein the output identifies a predicted attribute of the pattern ofthe particular chip layout.
 2. The storage medium of claim 1, whereinthe machine learning model corresponds to a particular step in a chipfabrication process and the output comprises a predicted attribute forthe pattern corresponding to the particular step.
 3. The storage mediumof claim 2, wherein the plurality of sets of silicon data comprisesilicon data generated from a test associated with the particular stepand the silicon data describes attributes observed for the other chiplayouts based on performance of the particular step on the other chiplayouts.
 4. The storage medium of claim 2, wherein the machine learningmodel comprises one of a plurality of machine learning models, and theplurality of machine learning models comprise another random forestmodel trained with training data based on silicon data associated withanother step in the chip fabrication process, wherein the other randomforest model is to generate an output to identify a predicted attributeassociated with the other step.
 5. The storage medium of claim 1,wherein the input comprises a feature set of the pattern and the featureset comprises features of geometric elements present within the pattern.6. The storage medium of claim 5, wherein the features of geometricelements comprise one or more of sizes of the geometric elements, shapesof the geometric elements, and distances between the geometric elements.7. The storage medium of claim 5, wherein each of the plurality ofdecision tree models comprises a respective set of test nodes and arespective set of leaf nodes, wherein at least a portion of each of theset of test nodes are to test whether the pattern includes a particulargeometric feature.
 8. The storage medium of claim 5, wherein the inputcomprises a feature vector to specify the feature set.
 9. The storagemedium of claim 5, wherein the instructions are further executable tocause the machine to parse a graphical representation of the pattern todetermine the feature set.
 10. The storage medium of claim 1, whereinthe particular chip layout is for a pre-fabrication version of a chip.11. The storage medium of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality ofdecision tree models comprises a respective set of test nodes and arespective set of leaf nodes and a linear regression model is attachedto each of the leaf nodes, wherein the linear regression model is togenerate a continuous value as an output of the respective decision treemodel.
 12. The storage medium of claim 1, wherein the predictedattribute comprises an attribute to be applied during performance of afabrication process to manufacture a chip with the particular chiplayout.
 13. The storage medium of claim 1, wherein the input comprises afirst input, the pattern comprises a first pattern representing a firstsub-area of the particular chip layout, and the instructions are furtherexecutable to cause the machine to: receive a second input describing adifferent second pattern in the particular chip layout; and generateanother output from the machine learning model based on the secondinput.
 14. The storage medium of claim 1, wherein the instructions arefurther executable to cause the machine to train the machine learningmodel with the training data, and training of the machine learning modelcomprises supervised training based on results of testing described inthe plurality of sets of silicon data.
 15. A method comprising:receiving an input at a machine learning model, wherein the inputdescribes a pattern within a particular chip layout, the machinelearning model comprises a random forest model trained using trainingdata based on a plurality of sets of silicon data, each of the sets ofsilicon data describe processing attributes observed in association withprevious fabrication processes involving other chip layouts, and thetraining data further describes geometric features of the correspondingto other chip layouts, wherein the random forest model comprises aplurality of decision tree models and a voting block to implement aparticular voting algorithm, and the other chip layouts are differentfrom the particular chip layout; generating results at each of theplurality of decision tree models, wherein the results identifypredicted processing attributes for the pattern; and performing a voteusing the voting block to determine, from the results, an output of themachine learning model, wherein the output identifies a predictedattribute of the pattern of the particular chip layout.
 16. The methodof claim 15, further comprising training the machine learning modelusing new silicon data to revise the random forest model.
 17. A systemcomprising: at least one data processor; a memory; and a machinelearning engine, executable by the data processor to: access aparticular machine learning model, wherein the particular machinelearning model comprises a random forest model trained based on aplurality of sets of silicon data generated from tests of previouslyfabricated chips; provide an input to the random forest model, whereinthe input comprises a feature set of a pattern within a particular chiplayout, and the feature set identifies geometric attributes of polygonalelements within the pattern; and generate a result at the random forestmodel based on the input, wherein the result identifies a predictedattribute of the pattern based on the plurality of sets of silicon data,and the result is generated based at least in part on determining,within the random forest model, that geometric attributes of the patternwere included in the previously fabricated chips, wherein the previouslyfabricated chips have chip layouts different from the particular chiplayout.
 18. The system of claim 17, wherein the memory stores aplurality of machine learning models comprising the particular machinelearning model, and each of the plurality of machine learning models isconfigured to predict a different attribute for a chip layout relatingto fabrication of a chip comprising the chip layout.
 19. The system ofclaim 18, wherein the different attributes comprise attributes relatingto different steps in a chip fabrication process.
 20. The system ofclaim 18, wherein the plurality of machine learning models comprise somerandom forest models configured to generate discrete result values andother random forest models configured to generate continuous resultvalues, wherein the other random forest models comprise linearregression models at each respective decision tree within thecorresponding random forest model to generate the correspondingcontinuous result value.